Encounter with State Police and K9 Today WOW - Page 9
Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 97

Thread: Encounter with State Police and K9 Today WOW

  1. Quote Originally Posted by G50AE View Post
    Garbage, unless they had probable cause to let the cainine conduct a search, that's what a dog does when it sniffs around, or that search was consented to, then anything resulting from that search is "seeds of a poison fruit" and inadmisable. You can't use one bad search to get probable cause to perform another search.
    I disagree. A canine search falls under the "plain sight" rule so long as the canine does not actually enter anything possessed by the subject. Can a police officer DETAIN me for the purpose of a canine search, absent any other indications of a crime/violation? No, certainly not. However, if the police officer has lawfully detained me already, such as at a traffic stop, and the canine is already there, then sniffing the outside of the vehicle would be considered plain sight.

    Can the officer detain me longer than necessary to write a speeding ticket because they want to wait for a canine to show up? Without probable cause of something other than speeding, no. That would be an illegal detainment and the future search by the canine resultant from the illegal detainment would be inadmissable.

    If I walk by a police canine and it alerts, can the officer detain me? Certainly, under the plain sight rule.

    Now, just because there is probable cause for a search does not give the officer free reign to conduct a search without a warrant or consent. The only time a police officer can conduct a search without consent or a warrant due to probable cause is if there is a reasonable and articulable reason to believe that evidence of the crime for which the subject is detained will be destroyed or lost before a search warrant can be obtained. If the officer truly has probable cause, they can detain the subject until a judge grants or denies a search warrant.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  2.   
  3. #82
    Yup I thought when K9 indicates something illegal you can be search with probable cause. Just like in the News

  4. Now here's a question:

    Let's say I wanted to fight a search based on probable cause because a dog alerted to something. In court, let's say that I prove (as in the OP's case) that the dog would alert on a narcotic that was prescribed and being carried in a prescription container in the prescribed amount. Would the probable cause then get tossed out in court, because obviously the dog could not discriminate between legal and illegal drugs? Just like carrying a firearm by itself provides no probable cause for a stop, just because the police officer wants to verify the person carrying the firearm is not prohibited.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  5. #84
    Well the OP did say "Troopers were all very professional not at any time did they treat me badly. "
    Maybe they went to far? But they still had the right to make sure he wasn't using?? Think of it through there eyes. They get all kinds of sob storied, excuses ectt. Probably unusual for them to find the OP who seemed to have his stuff together. Point is if a K9 is a tool of theres. Dogs don't like ect. There always a reason and few mistakes. Maybe when they saw the percription and CPL they shoulda just let it go after seeing he wasn't using at the time or seemed not to??

  6. Quote Originally Posted by ironmike86 View Post
    Well the OP did say "Troopers were all very professional not at any time did they treat me badly. "
    Maybe they went to far? But they still had the right to make sure he wasn't using?? Think of it through there eyes. They get all kinds of sob storied, excuses ectt. Probably unusual for them to find the OP who seemed to have his stuff together. Point is if a K9 is a tool of theres. Dogs don't like ect. There always a reason and few mistakes. Maybe when they saw the percription and CPL they shoulda just let it go after seeing he wasn't using at the time or seemed not to??
    Here's my take on it. Dog hits on the napsack. Since there was no unlawful detention ocurring at the time, I would say the "search" with dog would fall under plain sight rules. Once the cop verified that the dog hit on prescription drugs, carried in the prescription container all probable cause for anything immediately goes out the window, unless the cop can prove the dog would not hit on those prescription drugs and, therefore what was in the bottle MUST be something else.

    Given the fact that the drug in the bottle was exactly what it was supposed to be, and legal to be possessed by the person whose name was on the bottle, all probable cause is out the window.

    Let's say the cop proceeded to arrest the OP for operating a car under the influence of the drug, or carrying the firearm under the influence of the drug. Would the charge stick in court? I think only one way - the OP consented to the search. If the OP did not consent to the search, I don't think any charge would stick in court. Why? Because the dog could not differentiate between illegal drugs and perscription drugs, therefore the dogs initial hit on the prescriptions could not establish probable cause for a search.

    That is why you never, ever give consent to a search - because it takes away one vital element in your defense - the possibility that the search without your consent was illegal.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  7. #86
    People like g50ae are all the wiser. Keep listening to them for directions.

  8. #87
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Keysville Va.
    Posts
    304
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    Now here's a question:

    Let's say I wanted to fight a search based on probable cause because a dog alerted to something. In court, let's say that I prove (as in the OP's case) that the dog would alert on a narcotic that was prescribed and being carried in a prescription container in the prescribed amount. Would the probable cause then get tossed out in court, because obviously the dog could not discriminate between legal and illegal drugs? Just like carrying a firearm by itself provides no probable cause for a stop, just because the police officer wants to verify the person carrying the firearm is not prohibited.
    No the probable cause would not get thrown out. The dog was trained to alert on drug's. There is no way to train a K-9 as to illegal or non illegal drug's.
    More so then that you would only need Reasonable Suspicion about the drug's to go further in an investigation.
    BILL

  9. Quote Originally Posted by sgtbill View Post
    No the probable cause would not get thrown out. The dog was trained to alert on drug's. There is no way to train a K-9 as to illegal or non illegal drug's.
    More so then that you would only need Reasonable Suspicion about the drug's to go further in an investigation.
    BILL
    Well, in Washington state anyway, the State Supreme Court has ruled that just because a person is openly carrying a firearm does not justify even a Terry Stop by a police officer to determine if the person is in lawful possession of the firearm or not. Why? The police officer has no indication at the mere sight of a person carrying a gun that the gun is illegally possessed.

    So, why would the rules change for a dog alerting on the presence of drugs? Just because the dog alerts is no indication that there are drugs that are illegally possessed. Only that there are drugs present, exactly the same situation as a gun being carried.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  10. #89

    Arrow Encouters with K9's



    With the number of postings on this thread by NavyLCDR, this pic was eventually going to come up.

  11. #90
    good looking dog

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast